Mormonism Has Been Unvailed [Sic] -- 180 Years Too Late

[Uncle Dale]

.

It appears that some fellow back in Ohio has followed

in the footsteps of another Buckeye (adopted) and

recently tore down the veil (or vail? maybe vale?) that

has been hiding Mormonism from our collective view:

.

 

 

.

 

Didn't some guy named Rich Anderson demolish all of

this Hurlbut nonsense, back when most of us were still

in diapers?

 

Oh well...

 

UD

Edited February 28, 2015 by Uncle Dale

[The Nehor]

Well, nice to know that now I can finally get the whole story.

[Uncle Dale]

Well, nice to know that now I can finally get the whole story.

 

Unfortunately good old Eber Dudley didn't bother to

go out personally and verify much of what he had

printed up for him, piecemeal, at nights, when the

Telegraph press was otherwise unused.

 

 

Storm Rosa and his brother did most of the writing --

which actually consisted mainly of gluing together

old Telegraph articles, coupled with equally old

Ohio Star articles. Somewhere late in the process

a guy with a funny first name waltzed into the office

of Eber Dudley and sold the trusting editor a pig or

two in a poke. Turns out that he didn't hand over

the "smoking gun" blazed across the books already (?)

printed title page -- just a weird story about wandering

Romans that would have made Cooper's proof-reader

and Cooperstown editor die in fits of laughing, no doubt.

 

But Eber did get up off his anti-Masonic, pro-temperance, 

abolitionist behind long enough to talk to some old-timers

in Ashtabula County, and to mail off a letter to a guy by

the name of Isaac Hale (said to be blind, by no less a

witness than a Gold Bible witness).

 

Other than that, about the only real thing of value in the

November, 1834 book was a letter from soon-to-be

Mormonized W. W. Phelps, of Canandaigua.

 

Oh -- there's citable history in those pages -- here and there;

and if any of you would care to be criticized more harshly

than the "Rough Stone Rolling" biographer, you can try and

fit it into your next article for Meridian Magazine, or the Ensign.

 

Good luck with that...

 

UD

Edited February 28, 2015 by Uncle Dale

[Uncle Dale]

...

 

Didn't some guy named Rich Anderson demolish all of

this Hurlbut nonsense, back when most of us were still

in diapers?

 

 

In his "Preface" Dan Vogel says of Howe's book:

 

>Its importance was largely achieved through the inclusion of fifteen affidavits

>that were gathered from Palmyra and Manchester, New York, dealing with the

>Smith family's reputation and seven others from Harmony, Pennsylvania,

>concerning Joseph Smith's activities in that area.

 

 

There have been entire books written in rebuttal of these 22 "affidavits," and

entire books written in their defense.

 

For years it was common practice for LDS and RLDS historians to avoid 

mentioning them altogether, and to simply say something hostile regarding

the character of D. P. Hurlbut (by whose efforts Howe eventually obtained

the first mentioned set of 15 Palmyra-Manchester documents).

 

As time passed, and references to (and quotations from) these 22 affidavits

become commonplace in popular books and news articles, the Mormon

apologists and polemicists felt a need to somehow discredit the entire batch

of testimony. This was most easily accomplished by discrediting another

set of Hurlbut-gathered testimony texts, solicited from old-timer residents

living on both sides of the Ohio-Pennsylvania border, where that dividing

line met Lake Erie.

 

At one point the official LDS disgust with the content of these Hurlbut-collected

documents rose to the point of identifying the testimony-givers as being the

knowing or unwitting tools of Satan. Such a condemnation (coming from the

heir-apparent, and soon to be ordained, topmost Mormon leader), served to

destroy any possible document credibility in the eyes of Mormon questioners

and history buffs, but it had no effect in dampening non-Mormon conclusions.

 

For that (discouraging the non-Mormon writers) the documents were attacked

as being forgeries -- notarized or witnessed by unreal people and imaginary

New York officials. And, of course, D. P. Hurlbut's alleged lying nature and horrid

reputation could be invoked whenever Howe's book was even mentioned in

passing. The standard Mormon defense was that "Hurlbut wrote it."

 

Did he?

 

I was never taught that. But then again, in my few classroom notes, set down

in Lamoni, Iowa, I only see the book mentioned once -- and, I think that may

have been my own, student's marginal note.

 

But now it's 2015, and we can look up practically any recent volume or article

on Mormon history, and see pages from Howe's book cited in the footnotes,

without even a mention of their being nothing but persecution of the Saints

and the Devil's attempt to destroy the One True Church.

 

What happened?

 

UD

I sometimes feel like Rip Van Winkle, having gone to sleep

wearing my "Read Hugh Nibley!!" cockade, and waking up

at a "Rough Stone Rolling" book-signing autograph party.

Edited February 28, 2015 by Uncle Dale

[mfbukowski]

Vogel is pretty well known hereabouts.  I have never been impressed by a single argument he has made.

[Uncle Dale]

Vogel is pretty well known hereabouts. I have never been impressed by a single argument he has made.

Oh, I have -- now and then -- here and there.

His insistence that the BoM text must have had

but a single author has irked me occasionally,

but then again that was Brodie's conclusion and

the Tanners' big talking point, so I'm used to

hearing all of its supposed defenses. My own

working conclusion sides with the Saints, in

arguing for multiple contributors to the text;

but right after my making that initial statement

we part company.

Getting back to Howe's book, I've long had a

digital transcript posted at one of my websites.

Back before Google Books began offering the

viewing public actual scans of its pages, an

irate LDS mother contacted me and angrily

demanded that it be removed from my site.

"That is worse than pornography!" she typed

in solid caps at the end of her e-mail message,

after relating how her son somehow happened

upon the Internet Eber Dudley and Hurlbut.

At first I was intimidated enough to consider

complying with the mother's demands; but

elsewhere in her message she mentioned her

son driving over to see the bishop. I figured

that any kid old enough to get a driver's

license, is probably old enough to read stuff

from that particular 1834 tome.

UD

Whether two minutes of browsing thru Howe

is any worse (or better) than an equal amount

of time spent studying the uncensored image

of the statue adorning a box of Venus pencils,

I'll leave for the theological thought police to

inform us.

Edited March 1, 2015 by Uncle Dale

[Nevo]

I own nine of Dan Vogel's books and think all of them well worth the purchase price, but I'll need some convincing to shell out nearly forty dollars (or thirty on Amazon) for Vogel's "critical comments" on Mormonism Unvailed—since Mormonism Unvailed itself is already available online for free and Vogel's thoughts on the Hurlbut affidavits have already been laid out in his Early Mormon Documents series and in Joseph Smith: The Making of a Prophet. 

[Uncle Dale]

I own nine of Dan Vogel's books and think all of them well worth the purchase price, but I'll need some convincing to shell out nearly forty dollars (or thirty on Amazon) for Vogel's "critical comments" on Mormonism Unvailed—since Mormonism Unvailed itself is already available online for free and Vogel's thoughts on the Hurlbut affidavits have already been laid out in his Early Mormon Documents series and in Joseph Smith: The Making of a Prophet.

 

.

I've only seen the pre-pub text, but if those contents end

up being the length and breadth of Dan's "comments,"

you'll see them soon enough in the previews offered

by Amazon and Google books.

 

on-line preface

A really interesting article could be compiled, giving us

a reliable recounting of how the book came to be, what

Howe's role was, before, during and after the printing,

and what effects upon gentile perceptions the book

had between, say early 1835 and 1840, when L. L. Rice

bound up and sold a bunch of the printing forms he had

recently obtained. Dan credits this to Howe himself, but

that fellow (and his LDS wife and sister-in-law) were out

of the picture by the time Rice & Winchester came

along, and issued their "History of Mormonism."

Signature Books would be well advised to solicit one

of the Mormon historical writers who has already

studied Kirtland Mormon History, Howe, Hurlbut,

the Palmyra-Manchester witnesses, etc., and who

could produce a volume worth our money.

I'd suggest opening it with a "teaser" telling of Henry

Capron's Nov. 1835 visit with Smith at Kirtland, well after

Capron's son's witness testimony in Howe had been

published and circulated. Another of those times

when a fly-on-the-wall's listening in on a Joseph

Smith conversation would be priceless stuff.

UD

Edited March 1, 2015 by Uncle Dale

[Uncle Dale]

...

I'd suggest opening it with a "teaser" telling of Henry

Capron's Nov. 1835 visit with Smith at Kirtland, well after

Capron's son's witness testimony in Howe had been

published and circulated. Another of those times

when a fly-on-the-wall's listening in on a Joseph

Smith conversation would be priceless stuff.

UD

 

Meant to say "Capron's father's witness testimony"

 

Sorry about that. Here's some info from our friends

at the Joseph Smith Papers Project:

 

>Capron, Henry -- 14 Mar. 1815–18 Jan. 1865.

>Farmer, town officer. Born in New York.

>Son of Joseph Capron and Sabra Avery...

>Lived next to JS’s family at Manchester

>Visited JS, 30 Nov. 1835, in Kirtland

>Moved to Auburn, Geauga Co., ca. 1835

 

UD

 

Collins Y. Capron, older brother of Henry,

http://www.capronfamily.com/ui17.htm

early on moved to Auburn twp., Geauga Co.,

where he lived close to several other of the

Smiths' previous neighbors from Manchester,

NY: the Antisdales, the Butts, the Staffords, etc.

Henry Capron ended up in that same place.

http://www.auburntownship.org/AuburnHistory/

Edited March 1, 2015 by Uncle Dale

[Robert F. Smith]

I've only seen the pre-pub text, but if those contents end

up being the length and breadth of Dan's "comments,"

you'll see them soon enough in the previews offered

by Amazon and Google books.

A really interesting article could be compiled, giving us

a reliable recounting of how the book came to be, what

Howe's role was, before, during and after the printing,

and what effects upon gentile perceptions the book

had between, say early 1835 and 1840, when L. L. Rice

bound up and sold a bunch of the printing forms he had

recently obtained. Dan credits this to Howe himself,

but that fellow (and his LDS wife and sister) were out

of the picture by the time Rice & Winchester came

along, and issued their "History of Mormonism."

Signature Books would be well advised to solicit one

of the Mormon historical writers who has already

studied Kirtland Mormon History, Howe, Hurlbut,

the Palmyra-Manchester witnesses, etc., and who

could produce a volume worth our money.

I'd suggest opening it with a "teaser" telling of Henry

Capron's Nov. 1835 visit with Smith at Kirtland, well after

Capron's son's witness testimony in Howe had been

published and circulated. Another of those times

when a fly-on-the-wall's listening in on a Joseph

Smith conversation would be priceless stuff.

UD

Probably one of the most entertaining and useful ventures possible would be for you, Dale, to gather the off-the-wall comments by you in this thread, along with all your other wild comments on this board and elsewhere, and to publish them in book form.  They are lively, well written, and a lot of fun.  Maybe the best thing since Samuel W. Taylor used to entertain us with his adventures prospecting for uranium.

 

Naturally, you would need to edit some comments, and to group them into appropriate chapters.  I  think that LDS and RLDS people would buy it in considerable numbers.  Make you some more money, even if you don't need it.  You just have a way with words, Dale, and you show so much familiarity with both the LDS and Reorganized communities, and their history, that you should feel obligated to provide us with some perspective.

 

Footnotes wouldn't hurt here and there, but full documentation certainly not necessary.  In some way, such a book might even constitute your own style of memoir, and give everyone a laugh to boot.

[Uncle Dale]

 

...

 

 

Footnotes wouldn't hurt here and there, but full documentation certainly not necessary.

...

 

Once, when introduced at a JWHA meeting, I was described as

a cross between J. Golden Kimball and Hugh Nibley.

 

I don't cuss enough to stand in the shoes of Elder Kimball,

and my command of koine is pitiful in the shadow of the

great "no-maam-thats-not-history" guy.

 

So, I took it as a veiled insult.

 

But, perhaps it was meant as a compliment. Among the

"peculiar people," one never knows for sure.

 

UD

[Uncle Dale]

Hi, Dan --

 

Come again when you can stay longer.

 

UD

(no, I won't quote anything more

until it's published)

[Robert F. Smith]

Once, when introduced at a JWHA meeting, I was described as

a cross between J. Golden Kimball and Hugh Nibley.

 

I don't cuss enough to stand in the shoes of Elder Kimball,

and my command of koine is pitiful in the shadow of the

great "no-maam-thats-not-history" guy.

 

So, I took it as a veiled insult.

 

But, perhaps it was meant as a compliment. Among the

"peculiar people," one never knows for sure.

 

UD

Well, I think that it was meant to be taken sincerely.  Your name-dropping verbiage is a treasure, and you shouldn't be hiding it here on this board, but make it available to the masses.  Forgetting, for the moment, what Bertrand Russell said about the masses.

[Uncle Dale]

 

....said about the masses.

 

Reminds me of that Christmas eve in the Eternal City when

for our midnight services, who should stop by, but Pope....

 

uh, uh!

 

UD

[Tacenda]

Reminds me of that Christmas eve in the Eternal City when

for our midnight services, who should stop by, but Pope....

uh, uh!

UD

No lie?

[mfbukowski]

Oh, I have -- now and then -- here and there.

His insistence that the BoM text must have had

but a single author has irked me occasionally,

but then again that was Brodie's conclusion and

the Tanners' big talking point, so I'm used to

hearing all of its supposed defenses. My own

working conclusion sides with the Saints, in

arguing for multiple contributors to the text;

but right after my making that initial statement

we part company.

Getting back to Howe's book, I've long had a

digital transcript posted at one of my websites.

Back before Google Books began offering the

viewing public actual scans of its pages, an

irate LDS mother contacted me and angrily

demanded that it be removed from my site.

"That is worse than pornography!" she typed

in solid caps at the end of her e-mail message,

after relating how her son somehow happened

upon the Internet Eber Dudley and Hurlbut.

At first I was intimidated enough to consider

complying with the mother's demands; but

elsewhere in her message she mentioned her

son driving over to see the bishop. I figured

that any kid old enough to get a driver's

license, is probably old enough to read stuff

from that particular 1834 tome.

UD

Whether two minutes of browsing thru Howe

is any worse (or better) than an equal amount

of time spent studying the uncensored image

of the statue adorning a box of Venus pencils,

I'll leave for the theological thought police to

inform us.

His arguments are all the usual ones.  Everyone here has heard them a thousand times before.  Every anti in the world has the same arguments, you'd think they would be more creative.

 

On the other hand if they were more creative they would not be trying to disprove religion- they would be exploring all the possibilities open to mankind in different ways of seeing the world.

 

Very boring stuff.  History.   Snore.

 

See beyond that and universes open up.

 

I mean just look at this- it is religion without being religious, and guess what- no history at all http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle

 

Why doesn't Vogel attack something like this for fun?  No creativity whatsoever.  And this directly relates to Mormonism

Edited March 1, 2015 by mfbukowski

[Uncle Dale]

His arguments are all the usual ones.  Everyone here has heard them a thousand times before.

...

 

Very boring stuff.  History.   Snore.

...

 

.

Well, I like the guy, personally -- tho' I'd never let a thing

like that get in the way of some honest criticism.

 

Some of us are (well, to coin a term "different") -- spotting a

never before published scrap of historical recording in a book

like the one Dan has produced, gets us all heated up and

bothered -- cats on a hot tin roof as Elizabeth, or Tennessee,

or somebody described the feeling.

 

Sadly, after wading through most of the new book (I'm currently

pressing pages 392-393 against the glass of my trusty scanner --

eyesight too deteriorated nowadays to read the stuff directly),

I've only bumped about on a luke-warm livingroom sofa a

couple of times. Perhaps something in the final bunch of pages

will have me up shouting from the housetop, but I doubt it.

 

I'm not sure whether the author is merely attempting to put a

definitive copy of Howe in front of us, accompanied by useful

explanations -- or whether I'm somehow overlooking a subtle

but ingenious plan to overthrow the seventh dispensation of

the one true antidote to the Great and Abominable Church.

 

Perhaps neither.

 

Just as the EMD set was the necessary prelude and groundwork

for a Joe Smith biography (which was half Lehite biographies) I'd

guess that printing Eber Dudley's little venture into unvailing is but a

foretaste of a REAL review of Ohio Mormonism (from mound-builders

to Jeff Lundgren to the upcoming transfer of CoC properties to the

Corporation of the Bishop...)

 

UD

(just kidding about the sale of the temple to the Brighamites)

.

Edited March 1, 2015 by Uncle Dale

[Uncle Dale]

...

(no, I won't quote anything more

until it's published)

 

Of course, since the book's "Preface" has been posted to the

SigBooks site for a while, that part of the text is already known.

 

Here's one small oddity, from that section:

 

>"Golden Bible," Palmyra Freeman, ca. Aug. 1829.

>The original article has not been located, but it was

>also picked up by the Rochester Advertiser and Telegraph,

>Aug. 31, 1829.

 

This is a rather strange statement, coming as it does in a

preface dated Dec. 4, 2014. The historical society in Batavia

has long had that particular "ca. Aug. 1829" issue of the

Palmyra paper available on the web -- and easily found by

a simple Google search.

 

To make consultation even easier, there is a typescript of

the article, posted among various old items relating to

the life and times of W. W. Phelps, here:

 

More interesting, though, what Eber Dudley and the Rochester

paper printed, was not the full August 11, 1829 "Golden Bible"

article, as originally penned by Jonathan A. Hadley. Mr. Howe

got gypped in his exchange with the Rochester editor.

 

 

Worse yet, the Painesville reprint appeared in Elder Sidney Rigdon's

home-town newspaper (well, at least the closest and most easily

obtainable weekly periodical for folks in Mentor and Kirtland).

 

Both Orson Hyde and Eliza Snow (who were pre-1830 disciples of

Rigdon and his churchly superior, Alex Campbell) admitted knowing

about Joseph Smith, the plates, the gold bible, etc., months before the

Cincinnati Advertiser printed its June 2, 1830 account of a certain 

"Joseph Smith... who put his face into a hat... to give an account" of

the Nephites, etc. etc.

 

No -- Hyde and Snow knew of Smith and his gold bible long before

the Ohio newspapers were announcing the spring, 1830 publication

of the Book of Mormon. Rigdon's disciples had only to open up the

pages of Howe's weekly newspaper, back on Sept. 2, 1829, to know

the crux of the Nephite Record discovery "news." Thanks to Hadley

in Palmyra, and Howe in Painesville.

 

As for the local church leader, Elder Sidney Rigdon -- perhaps he

never bothered to read the Painesville Telegraph -- even though

that paper now and then printed reports about him and his activities.

 

Thus, Sidney Rigdon (having never read the Ohio newspapers) was

taken totally by surprise when his old lieutenant Parley P. Pratt showed

up on his front doorstep with "a strange book -- a very strange book!"

 

UD

[Guest]

The "Mormonite Impostion"...I like it!

[Uncle Dale]

The "Mormonite Impostion"...I like it!

 

 

It must have looked that way, to the Gentiles who heard the first

"restored Church of Christ" missionaries preach. To those unimpressed

listeners "the work" (as those first missionaries called it) seemed both

unnecessary and unwise. It was an extra twist that the latter day

preachers were attempting to "impose" upon a religion that had been

around nearly two millennia, with no "restoration" needed.

 

And, for their part, once those first preachers had begrudgingly accepted

the new moniker of Mormon (or Mormonite) they were quick to adopt the

same line of attack against other sects. Read the "Times & Seasons," and

the "Nauvoo Neighbor" of 1843-44 for some saintly finger pointing at the

"imposition" of Millerite second adventism, and similar religious scorn.

 

For those first missionaries, mainstream Christianity itself was a devilish

"imposition," knowingly promoted by hireling priests, whose motives were

to get gain and to push abominable creeds upon innocent, unsuspecting

parishioners, who had no idea of how demonic the world-wide scheme was;

an "imposition" designed to remove plain and precious parts parts from

the everlasting gospel and the divine plan of salvation.

 

Pots calling kettles, and all that...

 

UD

[Uncle Dale]

No lie?

 

.

 

Uh, well, I, uh ... the question is... is vague.

You don't say what kind of candy,

or whether anyone is watching or, uh...

At any rate, I certainly wouldn't harm the child....

 

UD

(for all you Futurama fans out there)

[pogi]

My own working conclusion sides with the Saints, in

arguing for multiple contributors to the text;

but right after my making that initial statement

we part company.

 

I'm curious who you suppose the other contributors are?  I'm assuming you mean Smith et al. and not Nephi et al.  Where do you see the stylistic differences, what books?

[Uncle Dale]

I'm curious who you suppose the other contributors are?  I'm assuming you mean Smith et al. and not Nephi et al.  Where do you see the stylistic differences, what books?

For the most part, I agree with Professor Criddle's analysis.

After removing the biblical chapters, he identifies the first

quarter of the book and the last quarter of the book (roughly

speaking) as the creation of Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery

on one hand, accompanied by Sidney Rigdon and Parley

Pratt on the other.

The central portion of the book, roughly from Mosiah into

the first part of 3rd Nephi, he identifies as a pre-written

text, that only has small insertions from the four Mormon

contributors. His working thesis is that Smith and Cowdery

began revising an existing text, but had to supply much

of their own composition after the "Book of Lehi" was lost.

At that point Cowdery came into public view as a known

associate of Smith's -- but Rigdon and Pratt remained

out of view, as ghost-writers.

Whether or not his interpretation of the language changes

discernible in the narrative is the correct one, those

linguistic artifacts are still there, for us to study.

There is another thread here that I contributed to today,

which mentions the very archaic English discernible in

certain parts of the Nephite Record. Here and there the

vocabulary and grammar evident matches the English

used even prior to the first publication of the KJV Bible.

No matter what we may think about the ancient Americas

or gold plates, etc., the text itself is a fascinating thing,

and (in my opinion) merits a great deal more study.

UD

[Robert F. Smith]

Reminds me of that Christmas eve in the Eternal City when

for our midnight services, who should stop by, but Pope....

 

uh, uh!

 

UD

That wasn't what Berty (the third Earl of Russell) had in mind.